Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rogoz

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Rogoż. (non-admin closure) treelo _radda 00:24, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rogoz

Unneeded disambiguation as all of the villages listed are "redlinked". Tavix (talk) 22:11, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this is still useful, if it can be verified that the villages exist (sometimes a place can appear in a database as a "village", when it is only a building such as a farm). A search on Google Maps only finds one, the village in Bihor County, and the unesco.org site mentions a church in Rogoz, Maramureş County, so at least two of them are villages. I don't know whether these places are notable enough for separate articles but if someone looks for information about one of them, this page will at least identify the possible places (also, there is a page for Rogoż, which is linked as a hatnote). —Snigbrook 22:29, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- If someone looks for one of the redlinked villages, chances are they already know more about the place than we do. - Mgm|^(talk) 00:38, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:30, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:31, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the Polish village: a disambiguation page without any blue links, even if there are undoubtedly multiple notable subjects with the same name, is useless. Nothing wrong with recreating (indeed, something wrong with not recreating) when an article on one or more of the Romanian villages is written. Nyttend (talk) 00:10, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. The pages on disambiguation clearly state it must point out blue links. - Mgm|^(talk) 00:38, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.